chapotraphouse

ya ik what i was saying was that photos are very good at conveying the true scale of cruelty.

for example U.S. censored photos after nuclear bombing of Japan

American public highly approved of the use of the bomb and believed that the U.S. decision to drop the bombs in Japan was justified. The paper also observes that after censorship was officially lifted, publications such as Life uncovered shocking, gruesome accounts of the aftermath of the bombings. Therefore, the photographs and captions support the idea that the U.S. government wanted to avoid domestic and international criticism for the brutality of the bomb that devastated Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Photographs in the August issue provided a distanced aerial shot of the cities, but neglected to show the moaning victims, the crowded hospitals, or any other indication of the devastation left behind by two of the most destructive explosions in human history. It took Life seven years to tell what Burchett had told the world; articles in the September 1952 issue called the victims of the atomic bombs the “Walking Dead”, and shocked its readers with graphic pictures of radiation-burns on young children

http://www.dukeeastasianexus.com/a-veiled-truth-the-us-censorship-of-the-atomic-bomb.html